UNITED STATES
v.
ATLANTIC REFINING CO. ET AL.
UNITED STATES
ATLANTIC REFINING CO. ET AL.
359 U.S. 952
Supreme Court of the United States (1959)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases
Opinion
Full opinion text not available for this case.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Braen v. Pfeifer Oil Transp. Co., Inc., 361 U.S. 129 (U.S. 1959)…e so he could board it, the catwalk gave way, causing the injury. The Court of Appeals reversed the judgment for - petitioner. 263 F. 2d 147. We granted the petition for certiorari because that decision seemed to be out of line with the authorities. 359 U. S. 952. In O’Donnell v. Great Lakes Co., 318 U. S. 36, a seaman was allowed to recover under the Jones Act even though he was injured on shore. The seaman was a deckhand. The ship was discharging her cargo through a conduit that was connected at its outer…
-
Seymour-Heath v. United States & George T. Goggin in Bankr., 417 F.2d 979 (9th Cir. 1968)…ax Court had exclusive jurisdiction to review any final order of the Renegotiation Board, is affirmed. Sec. 403(e) of the Renegotiations Act; 50 U.S.C.App. § 1191 (e) (1). Rushlight v. United States, 259 F. 2d 658, 659 (9th Cir. 1968), cert. denied, 359 U.S. 952, 79 S.Ct. 738, 3 L.Ed.2d 760 (1959); Bass v. United States, 221 F. 2d 494 (8th Cir.,), cert. denied, 350 U.S. 827, 76 S.Ct. 56, 100 L.Ed. 738. The fact that bankruptcy intervened in the present case does not change our conclusion. United States v.…